Itchy Ass 2

Your type: SCTI - Structured, Compromiser, Temperate, Introvert
You have strong opinions and you like things "just so". Still, your personality is modified by the fact you are willing to let someone else take the lead. You tend to be the person in the relationship that lets the other person dominate a large number of decisions. Most of the time, that doesn't bother you. You are more likely to have many private thoughts about what is going on in the relationship (or your life) before sharing your thoughts with a partner. This has some very good aspects to it. You are unlikely to erupt impetuously and cause arguments that way. On the other hand, you will often come to your opinions and conclusions by yourself, rather than through mutual discussion. This can be alienating to an extrovert. You might want someone who is like yourself and understands this. On the other hand, without an extrovert, things may stay bottled up and become big problems that could have been handled easier, earlier.

Flexibility
Possible Test Outcomes F - Flexible S - Structured
How this impacts the relationship: It makes good sense for at least one partner in a relationship to have some flexibility and not be determined to have things happen only one way. While it��s possible for two partners to be inflexible and highly opinionated about issues or lifestyle choices, this only works if the two people see the world in very similar ways and agree on appropriate actions and feelings. Otherwise, there��s a high chance for conflict as two people "set in their ways" hold their ground. Likewise, if neither partner cares much for how things are done, one or both partners may feel there��s no easy way to come to decisions. Or they might feel strongly about decisions and want to be sure that each partner is really being honest or fulfilled in the way their lives are being lived. Couples who are both highly flexible and have never vested their opinions and worked out their preferences may appear highly successful and perfectly matched on the surface �V but may drift apart because they haven��t engaged on matters of importance. A sub-category of this type may be that more rigid partners have a need to plan. Whereas their more flexible counterparts are happy being spontaneous. In an extreme situation, there��s no spontaneity when both partners are highly structured (and life gets boring) or both partners never plan and many things never happen (which gets disappointing).

Power Nature
Possible Test Outcomes D - Dominant C - Compromiser/Follower
How this impacts the relationship: Women are often drawn to a more dominant partner, perhaps because of social expectations or because men usually earn more than women and women often seek men to create security and leadership in their lives. Likewise, men have traditionally looked for women who would create a home, family and companionship, but not to be a peer or competitor in the workforce. This is changing rapidly, but in order to find the right partner, it��s important to be honest about whether or not one is seeking someone who is more, or less dominant, or evenly matched. If a person wants someone to take the lead, they��ll be disappointed if that person wants to share the lead, or be led. If someone naturally dominates, they won��t want resistance or anger. They��ll want gratitude. A new mode is sharing spheres of dominance and allocating times or areas for shifting the burden or privilege of leadership, depending on how you look at it. Many strong "Alpha" females want an even stronger Alpha male to make them feel they can occasionally relax and be taken care of. Some "new men" are happy to take on more domestic roles, or, at least occasionally, have a peer relationship where their female partner takes the lead in decision-making and bread-winning. There are also women who absolutely want to avoid any dominance by a man and don��t want to have their important values or lifestyle choices challenged. A high dominant woman might want a man who is more nurturing than dominant to help create a home life that she may be less likely to provide.

Temperament
Possible Test Outcomes H - Hot T - Temperate
How this impacts the relationship: Two passionate people may do fine together because they��re able to get their feelings out. They also may be more likely to solve their problems because they know who they are. Nonetheless, having equally hot temperaments is more likely to result in destructive conflict. It might be better to find someone who would know when to exercise restraint. On the other hand, when both partners share cool temperaments, it��s possible the real issues get shelved and the couple creates a working relationship that never deals with the issues that need attention. Two people who constantly avoid conflict may become more and more distant and the relationship could just coolly drift away, diminishing in importance and intimacy. A matched style of communication may work well when both partners are neither too hot-headed or too distant and cool. But if the difference in temperaments is significant, it can possibly be good for a relationship. It helps the person who��s passionate become more moderate with their reactions and over-dramatizations. Likewise, the more cool and emotionally rational person can learn to understand emotions and get in touch with their own feelings. Difference in this category may cause some conflict but it will also increase growth.

Emotional Sustenance
Possible Test Outcomes I - Introvert/Self-Nurturing E - Extrovert/People Person
How this impacts the relationship: This classic dimension has been proven to be important in couple compatibility. It��s not so much that individuals have to be the same, but they need to understand their own style, their partner's style and how to know how this will affect their communication, feelings of being nurtured, supported or left alone. People vary on how much alone time they need to regenerate. Some people don��t enjoy or derive comfort from spending time alone. Others need that time to reflect, heal, or make decisions. They may be social and enjoy people but when under pressure, they need personal space, not social support. Other people run to family, friends or co-workers to tell their troubles and get advice and support for their feelings and actions. People who vent and gain strength from the discussion may feel rejected if their partner won��t perform this function. It��s very important to understand if differences exist. If one person is self-nurturing and the other needs the significant people in their lives to be present and engaged, both partners need to understand that neither person is rejecting or harassing the other. They simply solve problems in different ways. If both partners are unwilling to open up and make their partner feel needed, if they never let the other person into their most private distress or private thoughts, the relationship may be emotionally disconnected. Conversely, if someone who gains strength from sharing widely takes their most intimate details out of the relationship, there��s a chance that other relationships would become equally intimate and could lead the person away from focusing on their primary relationship. Some kind of harmony here works best.

There��s one more thing to consider with this characteristic. You may be attracted to someone who is cool and controlled because you mistake their temperament for strength rather than emotional privacy. If someone is both a T and an I, they may not be emotionally available much of the time. This can be fine for two people who have the same emotional profile, but it can frustrate a true Extrovert enormously. Introverts who want to connect more emotionally will do well to find an Extrovert. But Extroverts who seek an Introvert who��s reluctant to modify his or her emotional make-up may feel their partner withdraws from their requests for intimacy and is rejecting them.

Itchy Ass

Did this test, just because I've got nothing better to do...well I have, I just don't want to do

Your type: XBCP - Risk Averse, Relaxed, Cautious, Seeks Predictability. You don't like romantic excess. You have don't like risk in general. You have a very coherent, comfortable personality type. You want a steadier, not volatile, not complicated emotional life. You look for balance; a home, a lifestyle that works, not just an absorbing career. You prefer a job that doesn't cause tension every day, and a relationship along those same lines. You want a companion and you want to guard against those things in life that make this less possible. You are essentially monogamous and want to find that one person who wants the same lifestyle that you do. You may not be politically conservative, but you are emotionally conservative and you would do best with someone very similar to you.

Romantic Risk
Possible Test Outcomes R - Risk Taker X - Risk Averse
Why they should be similar: If you��re cautious and you��re with someone who finds caution unattractive �V maybe even contemptible �V it��s an obvious theater for conflict and fear. A risk taker wants someone who doesn��t feel burdened with someone else��s conservative instincts and fears. A person who is averse to risk is not willing to pay the price of a wrong guess that could lead to bitter feelings and loss. A person who��s attracted to risk doesn��t want to feel like they��re hiding from opportunity and would feel guilty being with someone who was always upset and worried.

Exceptions: If you��re a risk taker who is sometimes scared by your actions, you might feel better being with someone who makes you think twice. Likewise, if you��re someone who feels you��re missing out on some of life��s excitement by having being too cautious, you might enjoy spicing up your life with someone who seems brave, confident and fearless.

Personal Intensity and Pace
Possible Test Outcomes A - High Energy/Type A B - Relaxed/Type B
People who have high energy don��t like being constrained by people who are laid back. A typical example is the person who wants to run out and see every museum on their vacation. The opposite is the person who wants to stop, relax, read a book or stay by the pool all day. The High-Energy person is bored silly sitting by the pool. The pool person finds the High-Energy partner��s pace frenetic and unpleasant.

These characteristics go far beyond vacations. They��re commonly referred to as Type A and Type B people �V overall approaches to the world that are completely different. Type A is driven, ambitious and likely to be successful in traditional terms. Type B is more balanced and may invest more time in family and relationships instead of work. Both types might feel the other has their priorities mixed up.

Two Type A��s are the ��Power Couple.�� Two Type B��s are the content couple in their RV, unconcerned with the pace of other people��s lives and uninterested in worldly recognition, or whatever else they might be missing out on.

Exceptions: Sometimes people are seeking to moderate their own pace. People who are seeking to ��stop and smell the roses�� may not want another Type A partner who will exaggerate their own incredible pace. Or Type B��s who are drawn to the world of the rich and successful will seek out someone who can fulfill their desire to give their world a boost. The caution here is that the Type B may really be a Type A wannabe, living vicariously through their Type A partner. Or there could be underlying jealousy or projection onto the other person �V urging them to be the person they really want to be.

Outlook on Life
Possible Test Outcomes O - Optimistic C - Cautious
Optimistic people don��t want to be brought down by what they see as unconstructive negativity and pessimism. They get their strength from their own sunny outlook. They feel it��s more likely for good things to occur if they operate from an expectation that they will occur. Negativity can make them mad and insecure. However, people who are worried about the down-side of possibilities don��t see themselves as pessimists, but as realists. They often see their sunny opposites as foolish, impetuous, or setting themselves up for disappointment or vulnerability. They may not trust the judgment of someone they think of as reactive or blindly optimistic. They may even see this person as immature or childish and discount their approach or opinion.

Of course, this infuriates the optimist who wants to share their experience of the world with their partner. It has the potential of ruining the relationship. The optimist may feel a too-cautious partner creates a self-fulfilling prophecy and contributes to a negative outcome. They don��t want to be with someone who is raining on their parade.

Exceptions: A person who generally thinks of the glass as ��half full�� may want to be with someone who brings out the joy in life and helps create more positive expectations. If they don��t downplay the possibility of their partner being correct, they can enjoy their partner��s positive attitude. Likewise, someone who has lived to regret a too-Pollyanna approach to the world, may be looking for a partner who sees the problems and downside of situations with clarity to save them from what they now see as their overly-optimistic expectations.

Predictability or Appreciation of Variety
Possible Test Outcomes V - Seek Variety/Bored by Routine P - Seeks Predictability/Comfortable with Routine
There are some people who prefer to spend every summer at the same lake they visited every summer growing up �V and the same lake they want to go back to every summer until they die. Other people can enjoy an experience, but not want to keep repeating it because they feel happier and more alive trying out new experiences. This relates to an overall personality characteristic where some people thrive because their life is predictable and habitual and others thrive because variety is their spice of life.

If people are unlike on this characteristic, there are often struggles about constants versus change. One person will feel deprived of their favorite things and habits and the other will feel stifled by the lack of adventurousness or diversity in the relationship.

Exceptions: If a person has enough predictability and wants someone who can introduce variety, then that person might want someone to bring them out of their structured lifestyle. Likewise, a person who has been having a free and changing life, they may get to a place where predictability is enticing. In that situation, opposites can attract. In real life, this kind of attraction is more likely to occur in a later stage where there has been an excess of one lifestyle for a long time. Then, a person who was happy with the way they lived is more likely to be compatible with someone who is different.

20051211

Been to Manchester last Friday.

So far I've got five offers :
University of Manchester : AAA/AABB
University of Warwick : AABb
University of Bristol : Unknown, though I've been told that I'm going to have an offer.
King's College, University of London : AAC/ABB
Queen Mary, University of London : BBC

Going to Imperial College for an interview next Wednesday. If all goes well, I should get another AAA offer from them.

Didn't do much this weekend. I've finished processing the photos for the year7,8 disco night on 2/12, and I have to finish the computing project database and the document writeup for it. I got a double quiz on Tuesday for Computing, testing two units at once.

And, if all goes well, I'll be back in Hong Kong on FRIDAY~~~~~

16/12/2005 14:05 to be precise :)

Google vs. Evil

An interesting article I found from a link in Xooglers (see link under Blogs on the right). The blog Xooglers is interesting as well, written by Ex-Googlers (thus Xooglers). Check it out sometime

Google vs. Evil

The world's biggest, best-loved search engine owes its success to supreme technology and a simple rule: Don't be evil. Now the geek icon is finding that moral compromise is just the cost of doing big business.

By Josh McHugh
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/google_pr.html

Life used to be so much easier for Sergey Brin. In the autumn of 1998, he and Larry Page unleashed Google with a clear mission: Help computer users find exactly what they want on the Internet. Newbies flocked to the site, grateful for a simple search engine that was both powerful and intuitive. More sophisticated techies came to appreciate Google's computational elegance and its willingness to shun the "portal" model that crammed ecommerce down their throats. Within months, Google became one of the most popular sites on the Web - and not long after that, "Google" became a verb. Today, Internet users spend about 15 million hours a month on the site. Google.com logs more than 28 million visitors each month, nearly as many as Yahoo! and MSN. Nearly four out of five Internet searches happen on Google or on sites that license its technology.

Google owes its swelling popularity to deft algorithms that quickly divine what's useful on the Web. But there's more to it than that. At Google, purity matters. Over the years, Brin and Page have resisted pressure to run banners, opting instead for haiku-like text ads and unintrusive sponsored links. They've taken a stand against pop-ups and pop-unders and refused ads from sites they consider to be overly negative. All the while, they've stubbornly kept the Google homepage concise and pristine. On just a faint whisper of a marketing campaign, the company pulled in an estimated $70 million last year (a third from licensing fees and the rest from ads).

The Google strategy appeals to every engineer's sense of The Way It Should Be. Build the best entry in the science fair. Do not tart it up. Do not make it more clever than it needs to be.

But a funny thing is happening on the way to Internet adulthood - Google's awkward teen years. The company's growth spurt has spawned a host of daunting questions that no data-retrieval system can easily answer. Should Google play ball with repressive foreign governments? Refuse to link users to "hate" sites? Punish marketers who artificially inflate site rankings? Fight the Church of Scientology's attempts to silence critics? And what to do about the cache, Google's archive of previously indexed pages? In April, the German national railroad threatened legal action to remove an obsolete site containing sabotage instructions.

Most major companies refer to a detailed code of corporate conduct when considering such policy decisions. General Electric devotes 15 pages on its Web site to an integrity policy. Nortel's site has 34 pages of guidelines. Google's code of conduct can be boiled down to a mere three words: Don't be evil.

Very Star Wars. But what does it mean?

"Evil," says Google CEO Eric Schmidt, "is what Sergey says is evil."

Of the Google triumvirate, Schmidt makes sure the company stays on course financially and strategically; Page keeps busy in the R&D lab, cranking out new features; and the 29-year-old Brin, in his role as Google's conscience and head policymaker, spends his days gripping the moral tiller - and in so doing, imposes his worldview on everyone else.

That puts Brin at the flashpoint of most of the major Internet-related controversies. He knows his decisions have far-reaching consequences. He feels the pressure that attends Google's growing power. "I do get fairly stressed," Brin says. "I'd like to feel a little less scrutinized."

Google has succeeded by adhering to one, pure principle: Do good by users. Now, for the first time in its history, Google is facing rifts between what's good for users and what's good for Google. And Sergey Brin is finding that purity just doesn't scale.

II.

Don't be evil. Brin has had to refer back to those three words quite a bit over the past year. Governments, religious bodies, businesses, and individuals are all bearing down on the company, forcing Brin to make decisions that have an effect on the entire Internet. "Things that would normally be side issues for another company carry the weight of responsibility for us," Brin says.

In March, lawyers representing the Church of Scientology requested that Google stop linking to a Norwegian anti-Scientology site called Operation Clambake. The church claimed the site, xenu.net, displayed copyrighted Scientology content and that by providing links to the information, Google was in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Much to the dismay of many First Amendment fans, Google caved, removing the offending pages from its index.

In May, Anita Roddick, the outspoken British founder of the Body Shop, blasted Google in her blog for yanking a text ad for her site. Google's explanation: Roddick had called actor John Malkovich a "vomitous worm" in her blog, violating a Google policy against accepting ads for sites that are "anti-" anything. After Roddick protested, Google offered to reinstate the ad in exchange for a promise from Roddick that she would remove the Malkovich reference from the first page of her site. When she refused, Brin had a decision to make: Should he give in and accept Roddick's money, or stand by his principles? He chose his principles.

Three months later, Daniel Brandt, who runs google-watch.org, attacked PageRank, the algorithm at the heart of Google's vaunted system, accusing the company of being unfair and undemocratic. Brandt urged the FTC to investigate Google and regulate it as a public utility - as a company that, in effect, controls access to the Internet's natural resources. The mainstream press tended to dismiss Brandt as a webmaster spurned by a low Google ranking, but in the online forums and weblogs, many agreed with his assertion. As far as search engines go, Google has become the only game in town.

Then in the first week of September, Brin found himself pulled into matters of foreign policy. He received several emails from users telling him that the Chinese government, worried about political dissent in the weeks before the 16th Chinese Party Congress, had shut down access to the site. "Our Chinese traffic was down by a factor of five," Brin says. "We were blocked."

Brin was no expert on international diplomacy. So he ordered a half-dozen books about Chinese history, business, and politics on Amazon.com and splurged on overnight shipping. He consulted with Schmidt, Page, and David Drummond, Google's general counsel and head of business development, then put in a call to tech industry doyenne Esther Dyson for advice and contacts. Google has no offices in China, so Brin enlisted go-betweens to get the message to Chinese authorities that Google would be very interested in working out a compromise to restore access. "We didn't want to do anything rash," Brin says. "The situation over there is more complex than I had imagined."

Four days later, Chinese authorities restored access to the site. How did that happen? For starters, the Chinese government was deluged with outcries from the nation's 46 million Internet users when access to Google was cut off. "Internet users in China are an apolitical crowd," says Xiao Qiang, executive director of New York-based Human Rights In China. "They tend to be people who are doing well, and they don't usually voice strong views. But this stepped into their digital freedom."

The quick workaround: Chinese authorities tweaked the national firewall, making the new Google China different from the site that was turned off. Today, Chinese who use Google to search on terms like "falun gong" or "human rights in china" receive a standard-looking results page. But when they click on any of the results, either their browsers are redirected to a blank or government-approved page, or their computers are blocked from accessing Google for an hour or two. "They have a new mechanism that can block the results of certain searches," Brin says. Did Google help China find or obtain the filtering technology? "We didn't make changes to our servers" is all he'll say.

In late October, a report by two Harvard researchers revealed that Google had begun filtering its own servers to block users in Germany, France, and Switzerland from accessing sites carrying material likely to be judged racist or inflammatory in each country. Neither Brin nor anyone else at Google will talk about about the preemptive self-censoring moves in Europe.

In the wake of these international incidents, members of Google's loyal, tech-savvy constituency began to question the company's motives. "I am a little on the fence about Google's latest actions," wrote Brian Osborne, a staff writer for Geek.com, a news site. "On one hand, I understand Google's stance that it must remain in compliance with German and French laws. Nevertheless, Google is putting itself on a very slippery slope."

III.

"What is this?" asks a visitor squinting at the form he must sign before proceeding to the cafeteria at Google's Mountain View, California, headquarters. "An NDA? To have lunch?"

The receptionist shrugs. "This is Google," she says. "They're crazy that way."

The Googleplex, contrary to almost every written account of the place, is hardly a haven of easygoing geek whimsy. The cafeteria is adorned with a tie-dyed banner, but the Google employees aren't humming any Dead songs. Most of them appear deadly serious. Brin's second-floor office overlooks a courtyard festooned with empty hammocks. A book about Enron rests on his coffee table.

Brin's designation as Google's policy maven is relatively new. He, the big thinker, and Page, the mad scientist, complemented each other and shared nearly every role in Google's early years. "Larry was always the driver," says Scott Hassan, who did much of the programming for the original Google. "A big part of his role was going around and yelling 'Why can't it do this? Why isn't this working?'" Brin would sit next to Hassan and watch him write code, pointing out errors and taking an occasional turn at the keyboard.

The frenetic Page looked at all the popular engines at the time and decided they were going about search the wrong way. By relying on HTML code - meta tags as well as page text - they would bring back all sorts of irrelevant information and open themselves up to massive manipulation by webmasters looking to increase their own rankings. Brin took Page's observation and ran with it. He figured the best way around the problem was to harness the vast repository of human judgments already preserved on the Internet in the form of hyperlinks. "Most people search for local maximums - like figuring out how to get the best car, the best immediate situation," Hassan says. "Sergey is always searching for global maximums."

By 2001, Google's breakneck growth convinced Page and Brin it was time to establish a more rigid structure. Page handed over the CEO title to Schmidt and became copresident with Brin. The move freed up Page to focus on developing his knack for product development (as a child, he crafted a printer out of spare parts and Lego blocks). Brin's passion for the big picture made him the natural choice to spend time on Google's growing role in the world.

Which means Brin's views on politics and policy matter quite a bit. Not that he's willing to talk. He tells me he listens to NPR on his morning drive to work. I think Democrat and ask about his voter affiliation. He says he votes across party lines. Independent? He smiles and tells me there's no easy shortcut toward figuring out how he comes to his decisions about good and evil. And even if there was, he wouldn't let me in on it. If I succeed in figuring out exactly what he considers good and evil, people who don't care about Google users might start gaming him the way they try to game his search engine.

Born in Moscow and raised in the suburbs of Washington, DC, Brin grew up listening in on conversations at the dinner parties thrown by his father, a math professor, and his mother, a NASA scientist. Talking about his decisions and the values he holds most dear, Brin chooses his language carefully, but one word he repeatedly comes back to is "useful." And while Google's policy decisions over the past year look a bit haphazard at first glance, they begin to make more sense in a worldview where usefulness is the paramount virtue.

Aside from the indisputable goodness of causing hard-line Communist Party officials to say the word "Google" to one another for a few days, it's difficult to say on which side of the good-evil line the company's China resolution falls. Brin seems at peace with how it all turned out. "Political searches are not that big a fraction of the searches coming out of China," he says. "You want to look at the total value picture that a search engine like Google brings and think of all that it's used for."

But Xiao Qiang, the activist, thinks the company should have taken a firmer stand. "Ultimately, China's state censorship mechanism will have to submit to this growing demand for freedom from Chinese netizens," Xiao says. "It's important to protect integrity, particularly for an Internet firm."

On the same day that China blocked access to Google, it also flipped the switch on AltaVista. AltaVista issued a defiant statement to the media and went on to list several ways to access the site. Months later, AltaVista is still blocked. Brin figures that by meeting China halfway, Google remained available - and useful - to visitors and also preserved its advertising revenue there. "You have to look at the total value picture," he says.

What about the Scientology mess? Didn't Google give in too easily? Jennifer Urban, a fellow at Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law and a member of Chilling Effects, an organization formed to document attempts to stifle speech on the Internet, says that from a legal standpoint, Google's hands were tied. "To qualify for safe harbor protection from liability, they really have to err on the side of taking down the link," Urban says.

In fact, Google didn't fold entirely. After consulting with Brin, Kulpreet Rana, Google's head of IP, found a way that Google could comply with the law without letting the Scientologists erase their critics from the Internet. The solution: When Google gets a request to remove a link under the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA Section 512, it substitutes a link to a form on the Chilling Effects' site. The form contains the Web address of the page in question, and anyone still interested in the site can direct their browser to the address.

Does abiding by the letter of a bad and flimsy law absolve Google from charges that it squashed free expression? Cindy Cohn, legal director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, is certain that a vigorous legal challenge would put an end to the steady flow of Section 512 filings Google receives but admits she doesn't expect Google to devote its resources to such a broad fight. And while some cheered Google's workaround as evidence of a rebellious bit of payback - a small point scored against the enemies of unfettered speech - the move is another instance of Brin choosing the path of usefulness over a righteous crusade.

IV.

If Brin's code of good and evil permits the company to negotiate with sovereign governments and allows for some legal meddling from unpopular religions, there is no wiggle room - no gray area whatsoever - when it comes to those who attempt to subvert the power of Google to their own commercial ends. One thing Brin is sure of: On the side of evil lies trickery.

I ask Brin to imagine, for a moment, running his company's evil twin, a sort of anti-Google. "We would be doing things like having advertising that wasn't marked as being paid for. Stuff that violates the trust of the users," he says, describing a site that sounds not unlike the pay-for-placement search site Overture. "Say someone came looking for breast cancer information and didn't know that some listings were paid for with money from drug companies. We'd be endangering people's health."

The anti-Google might also be more amenable to the growing business of "optimization," the altering of Web sites so that they rank higher in search engine results. For a fee, there's help for a Dallas plumber who's unhappy that his site is on the 17th page of results when someone types "Dallas plumber" into Google. An optimizer will tweak the site in such a way that boosts it to, say, the 3rd page of results.

To pull this off with Google, an optimizer needs to understand how the company's search mechanism works. Google uses 100 or so closely guarded algorithms to determine its search results. The best known of the lot is called PageRank, which allocates relevancy to a page according to the number and importance of pages linked to it, the number and importance of pages linked to each of those pages, and so on. One ploy is to create "link farms," in which an optimizer gets clients to link to one another, racking up relevancy points. In general, optimizers make a living by guessing what Google regards as important. The way Brin sees it, the optimizers are co-opting Google's bond of trust with its users. He regards optimizers the way a mother grizzly might regard a hunter jabbing at her cub with a stick.

Every month, when Google updates its index and its mix of algorithms, it rakes a disruptive claw across the optimizers' systems. In the industry, the monthly shuffle is known as the Google Dance, and Brin doesn't mind letting on that if Google ends up dancing all over the optimizers, so much the better. "When we change and improve our technology, things get shuffled around," Brin says, "and sometimes it has a disproportionate effect on optimization sites."

Consider the case of Bob Massa, a former solid oak dining room furniture salesman who lives in Oklahoma City and runs SearchKing, an optimization company he started in 1997. Last summer, Massa received a rare gift from Google in the form of the Google Toolbar, a software program that lets users perform searches without going to Google.com. More important for Massa, the Toolbar shows the approximate PageRank, on a scale of one to ten, of whatever page a user is visiting. It was the first time since Brin and Page were in grad school that they'd shared so much technical information. After years of watching Google's every move like an Etruscan high priest trying to augur divine intent from cloud formations, Massa had a piece of the goods. On August 9, Massa started selling optimization based on PageRank.

After the Google Dance of September 20, most of Massa's customers suddenly found themselves in a heap at the very bottom of Google's 3 billion site index. It seems that the improvements Google had made included a severe downgrade of sites with links to SearchKing. Massa's customers, needless to say, were very, very unhappy. "Everyone thinks I'm the biggest idiot in the world for making Google mad," Massa said in October.

He filed suit a few weeks later, charging that Google downgraded his customers' scores in a deliberate attempt to put him out of business. The suit asks for an injunction forcing Google to restore the scores to pre-Dance levels, and seeks $75,000 in damages. "It's a classic good versus evil thing," says Massa, turning Brin's framework back on Google itself. "I knew they wouldn't like it. I didn't think they'd go so far as to wipe out all these little people."

The day Massa's suit was filed, the reaction from the Slashdot crowd and most other forums was predictably vociferous, with posters stumbling over themselves to craft metaphors painting Massa as a criminal suing his victim. But gradually, a surprising number of people, while careful not to look as though they were defending Massa, began tagging the search engine as a Google-opoly. It's hard to sympathize with a David as parasitic as Massa, but Slashdotters tend to be uneasy with Goliaths of any stripe, especially when their methods are kept secret.

And the real problem with Massa is that he's simply the termite Brin is able to see. There are thousands more behind the wall, invisibly boring away at the very structure of Google's house. "It's easy to become overly obsessed with those kinds of things," Brin admits.

It would make things a lot easier for Brin if the world's webmasters would just act as though his site didn't matter, but that's not human nature. There's no way around it - as long as Google remains the search engine of choice, the arms race between Google coders and the hordes of optimizers will go on.

V.

As proficient as Google is at revealing information, Brin is adept at keeping key morsels under wraps. In a way, that makes a lot of sense. Although the obvious image of Google is one of accumulation, the essence of data retrieval is just the opposite. Google is about division and subtraction, narrowing down billions of choices before revealing the most promising. Brin's world isn't as simple as visible equals good, hidden equals evil. Google's effectiveness as a search tool depends largely on how well it's able to shroud the site's inner workings from the commercial interests that clutter so much of the Internet today.

But here's the thing: If Brin thinks his job has become more difficult over the past year, it may soon become near impossible. In September, at the height of the China controversy, Google legal eagle Drummond spotted an article about the prospect of a Google IPO, which, the story said, might be the spark to ignite the dormant public offerings market. Drummond forwarded the story with some sardonic comments. In his office, Brin tries to find the email for me but can't. He notes the irony in that, and goes on to paraphrase the note: "Oh, OK, now we're going to reform the Chinese government - and on top of that, we're going to fix Wall Street."

Schmidt claims the company is in no rush to go public, but his appointment and the hiring of CFO George Rayes last August were unmistakable steps in that direction. When the IPO comes, it will bring riches - and more problems.

As a private company, Google has one master: users. As a public company, there are shareholders to worry about. And more than happy users, shareholders want ever-greater profits. Thus far, Brin and Page have succeeded in standing up to pressures that might compromise Google and the user experience. Google's influential stand against pop-up ads extends beyond its own domain - the company rejects advertisers whose links take Google users to pages that feature pop-ups. (AOL followed suit in October, announcing its own pop-up moratorium.) But when Google becomes a public company, shareholders might force the site to take a more amenable position, if the price is right. After all, for several years, Yahoo! refused to accept anything but fast-loading banner ads, claiming that it was looking out for users. That policy lasted until right about the time that the company's stock price began to cave.

Such pressure could cause Brin to rethink other policies, like his decision to refuse all alcohol and tobacco advertising. The fact that Google accepts advertising for adult content sites is an intriguing commentary on Brin's morality: Cigarettes and booze are evil; porn is not. It's a policy that would become progressively harder to defend were Google to go public. Then there's the Google cache to consider. Today's users love having access to a warehouse of information that was once published on the Internet but has since disappeared. Some information goes away for a reason, though. The cache could get Google in trouble, and Brin & Co. could soon find themselves facing all sorts of libel, defamation, or copyright lawsuits.

Increased competition may also cause Brin to do other things he's loath to do. So far, Google has gotten by without much in the way of competition from the other Internet superpowers. But in May, Yusuf Mehdi, the head of MSN, said he views Google as "more of a competitor than a partner" in the effort to become the default homepage on millions of browsers. What if, as Google.com solidifies its position as the focal point of the Internet, Yahoo! and AOL begin to rethink the millions in licensing fees they pay to what has become a top competitor? Brin may be forced to make the kind of concessions that he's thus far reserved for international governments.

The utilitarian manner in which Google has achieved its success has made it a sentimental favorite among the code-parsing set. Tech-community sites like Slashdot are almost uniformly pro-Google. Those with the temerity to bring lawsuits against Google ultimately feel the burn of online flames, watching their servers wither under the quasi-zealous wrath of thousands of engineers defending one of their own. But as Google is forced to make more concessions to realpolitik, its bonds with that idealistic constituency will inevitably continue to fray.

And without any sort of technological lock-in, it would be very easy for Google's visitors to simply start using other search engines. Fast Search & Transfer, based in Norway, boasts a 2.1 billion-page index at www.alltheweb.com, and its search engine works as quickly as Google's. What's more, it does a complete crawl of the Internet every 7 to 11 days compared with Google's 28 days. What if an influential group of politically active netizens makes a rousing case for boycotting Google on the grounds that it is anti-free speech and in cahoots with repressive governments? How long can a hugely powerful company that plays its decisions so close to the vest and refuses to justify itself publicly count on the devotion of the average information-hungry Web user?

It's inevitable that a company of Google's size and influence will have to compromise on purity. There's a chance that, in five years, Google will end up looking like a slightly cleaner version of what Yahoo! has become. There's also a chance that the site will be able to make a convincing case to investors that long-term user satisfaction trumps short-term profit. The leadership of the Internet is Sergey Brin's to lose. For now, at least, in Google we trust.

200511192037

Haven't posted anything for quite a while.

Nothing much has changed. Going to two universities the following weeks (23/11 Bristol, 30/11 Warwick). The train tickets are so F-ING expensive. they cost me nearly �G70!!!

Noticed utp/rj45's got a new samsung palm phone. I'm definitely gonna have a good look at that when i get back!!!

Speaking of getting back, it's now less than a month (leaving on 15/12 evening)! Time files...sometimes

It seem slow when i think of going back to hong kong, but it seems ridiculously fast when i have to revise/finish my computing project...etc(i shoul've finished the implementation of the access database two weeks ago, though i still haven't finished. Although i'm not the only one, i'm the slowest in class.

Windows live and office live...let's see what microsoft's trying to do this time. personally i think google's gonna do a better job putting the (rumoured) open office online (aka sun's star office), and i'll most likely use the google one instead of the microsoft one...if i'm ever gonna use either of them. network is computer. sun's dream is finally starting to come true.

by the way, Microsoft Access SUCKS

Digital��e�Rc?

Read from PUMB, a software called NeoImaging, and it seems like it
can produce a "e�Rc" effect...better try it sometime...

http://neoimaging.beareyes.com.cn/

20051029

well well well......

holiday's over......i mean after hk3zone's gathering, holiday's over.

i haven't done any school stuff this holiday.

fuck.

well...let's see...i got economics, critical thinking and computing homework that i should now have finished.

reality is, i haven't started any yet.

i'm fucking screwed.

p.s. found portable firefox, spent nearly two hours customising it for use in dulwich...another two hours gone =.=

20051027

Did quite a bit of coding on this blog...
- recent comments on the sidebar
- reversed archive list
- expandable posts (see my extended essay below, before it disappears)
- added atom feed validation
- Change UK time to GMT

Went to Theo's place today
What a mess :x
But the pdas(toys) were great fun, especially the Phone Module of Visor
Speaking of Theo, thanks for linking me to your blog.

ONLY 4 MegaPixels? Think again......!!!

http://www.grafphoto.com/articles/printdogma.html
a reply to dickheads who think pixel count means everything :D

Man Mo Temple

Man Mo Temple (��Z�q)



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/man_mo_temple

Central Market

Central Market (�����)



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/central_market

Extended Essay

The Future of Palm OS

In the third quarter of 2004, the sales figures of Microsoft's Pocket PC based devices, for the first time, overtook that of PalmSource's Palm OS based devices. Why has this happened? Let's take a look.

Palm OS was created back in the mid-1990s by Jeff Hawkins. It was the first widely popular PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) operating system. The Pilot1000 was the first Palm OS based device. It runs Palm OS 1.0. But it wasn't until PalmIII was released that made Palm OS the most favourable operating system on PDAs.

Seeing the success Palm OS has, Microsoft decided it would start its PDA business. It launched Windows CE, which stands for Consumer Electronics. The first few versions were a joke, but eventually it developed into a strong operating system, and, in some ways better than Palm OS. Windows CE devices, now called Pocket PCs, are traditionally better at multimedia, while Palms are best known for their simplicity, especially in PIM (Personal Information Management). Palm OS��s capabilities have improved a lot since the first release.

The report from analyst group IDC last February states than 2004 is the forth successive quarter of a year-over-year decline in the PDA market. pa1mOne, which has 42% market share in forth quarter of 2004, has an 11.1% decrease in shipments. The second largest vendor, Hewlett-Packard, has a market share of 27.5%, with also a 10.7% decrease in shipments. One of the reasons is the relatively new category of handheld computing �V the PDA Phone and the Smartphone.

At the Palm Mobile Solution Conference 2005 held in Hong Kong last June, a few speakers have stated that by the year of 2007 the sales of Smartphones would exceed the sales of traditional PDAs. A study from analyst group Gartner also forecasts a sale of one billion mobile phone units (which includes PDA Phones and Smartphones) in the year of 2009. The rapid development in 2.5G (GPRS), 2.75G (EDGE) and 3G standards, and also Bluetooth and WiFi allows us to have more affordable access to data and the internet via the mobile phone networks. Therefore, the future of the PDA market would not just be a continued development of the traditional PDA functionalities, e.g. PIM (Personal Information Management), multimedia, gaming, but also a convergence into the PDA Phone/Smartphone market.

Palm OS has a very successful family of PDA Phones, known as Treo. The latest model, Treo650, is one of the best selling Palm OS devices, with a market share of over 30%. Palm��s senior officers have, in various events, said that PDA Phones are what Palm is going to be focusing on.

Another two other major player exists in this market �V Symbian and RIM (Research In Motion). Here I must first explain the differences between a PDA phone and a Smartphone. A PDA phone is a PDA with phone capabilities and functions. An example would be pa1mOne's Palm OS based Treo650, O2��s Windows Mobile based Xda iis or SonyEricsson��s Symbian UIQ based P910i. A Smartphone is a phone with relatively advanced functions, e.g. some basic PIM system. An example would be GSL's Palm OS based M98, Motorola��s Windows Mobile based MPx220, or Nokia��s Symbian Series60 based 6600. RIM��s Blackberry devices are hugely popular to corporate users who would like to access corporate emails behind firewalls. It was a black horse in 2004, where its market share rose from 6.4% in 2003 to 18.6% in 2004, a 236.6% growth, making it the third largest PDA operating system player.

Another market that Palm would focus on is the Portable Media Centre. This is a market which is newly developed, and currently Microsoft is pushing its PMP (Portable Media Player). The selling point of the Palm OS PMPs is the additional PDA functionalities and wireless connections. The LifeDrive released in the second quarter of 2005 is the first Palm OS device that has a built-in 4GB hard disk, and the first Palm-branded device to have dual wireless connections (Bluetooth and IEEE 802.11g WiFi). Previously Sony��s Clie UX-50 already have dual wireless connection, but the battery life is not enough.

This is also very important for Palm to stay within the game. Although this is not the first PDA with a built-in hard disk, this is the first one aimed at the consumer market (the first PDA with a built-in hard disk is Sharp��s Zaurus SL-C3000, which is Linux-based, aimed at computer enthusiasts). The traditional PDA market is saturated and declining, and new ideas, directions and market has to be created in order to continue to grow with other strong competitors, e.g. the above mentioned Microsoft Pocket PCs, Microsoft Smartphones, Symbian-based Smartphones, and Linux-based PDAs.
I think if Palm OS continues with the current trend, it would definitely loose to Microsoft. To prevent this from happening, PalmSource should stop the current licensees from leaving, and encourage them to develop more devices. Sony was once a Palm OS licensee, and so was Tapwave. Sony last year decided to stop all production of Cli?s, and Tapwave just closed down. Samsung is a licensee, who has released quite a few phones, but none of them are widely available in the market.

Some Palm enthusiasts have been waiting for Palm OS Cobalt (6.x) to be released. In reality, 6.0 has already been released at December 29, 2003, and then discontinued. Palm OS Cobalt's latest version is 6.1, with some new standardization in old features, and adding Simplified Chinese support. The major difference is that it supports native VGA resolutions (640x480 and 480x640). In fact, Palm OS Cobalt 6.1 was released shortly afterwards Microsoft announced and released their VGA support. Given Palm OS Cobalt had BeOS inside its kernel, and BeOS��s engineers helping, supporting native VGA in 6.0 should not have been a problem.

There were rumours that Palm OS Cobalt has been discontinued and all resources have been moved to developing Linux. In fact, Cobalt has never been discontinued. The release of Cobalt 6.1 proves that, and the first Palm OS Cobalt device was shown at the PalmSource Developers�� Conference in May 2005. It is a Smartphone by Oswin, a Singapore subsidiary company of the Hong-Kong based Group Sense Limited (GSL). Porting to Linux does not mean it is the end of Palm OS Cobalt, but, rather another way out for Palm OS. The acquisition of the NanJing based software company, China MobileSoft (CMS), is for implementing Palm OS on top of Linux. CMS has plenty of experience in developing software for mobile phones, and have also been developing a version of Linux optimised for mobile devices. This enables PalmSource to develop more software for PDA Phones, and more importantly, increasing the attractiveness of Palm OS. Currently a hardware developer has to do low level re-designing and programming in order to get Palm OS to run on their devices, but actually a lot of these are designed and built to run a Linux-based OS. By providing a PACE (Palm Application Compatibility Environment, an application environment that is equivalent to Palm OS 4.1) on top of Linux, it shortens development and deployment time, and also lowers the cost for licensees with their already developed hardware. Not to mention the huge enthusiast base of Linux, which would bring improvements for free, all over the world, thanks to the open-source nature of the operating system. Palm OS Cobalt and Palm OS Garnet would still be provided and supported in the foreseeable future, and judging from feedback from its licensees, PalmSource will decide if it will continue the development of a new native Palm OS. However, it gave many impressions that it is almost entirely focused on Palm OS for Linux. Already Palm is preparing for Linux development. Recently Palm has been recruiting Linux software engineers.

In the near future, I think Palm OS Garnet would still be the most widely availably Palm OS on the market. At least one of PalmSource��s licensee will release a Palm OS Cobalt device as a flagship model when the first Windows Mobile 2005 device is available. I don��t think Palm OS Cobalt devices would be available before Windows Mobile 2005 is released because the Palm OS side isn��t in the position to be attacked by Microsoft with its Windows Mobile 2005, and releasing it before Windows Mobile 2005 means than Microsoft would aim at Palm OS Cobalt��s weaker spots and attack. A dual wireless device has to be released as well, without a hard disk drive. This is a device configuration that Pocket PCs have for two years, and I think this is one of the minor reasons that Palm OS��s market share is dropping. Something like a Tungsten T|5 with WiFi would do. A low-end device with Bluetooth should also be released, something like an upgrade of Palm��s Zire 31. To attract corporate users, there is already software for connecting to RIM��s Blackberry protocol. This should be bundled with the Treo family, since the Treos all have built-in keyboards. A new Treo should also be released. Corporate emails can be accessed using data connections of the mobile phone network. An equivalent of an upgrade of Palm��s Tungsten|C should also be released. This device has WiFi built-in, and VoIP (Voice-over-IP) capabilities, also aimed at corporate users, for use in offices.

Reference:

Websites:
PalmInfoCenter (http://www.palminfocenter.com)
Brighthand (http://www.brighthand.com)
Writing on your Palm (http://www.writingonyourpalm.net)
PDA User Message Board (http://www.pumb.org)
http://www.snarc.net/

Special Thanks:
Mr Theo Poon

Crystal

Crystal @ Tai Po Waterfront Park

Not a lot of photos...mainly due to my horribly exposed roll of expired Kodak HD200.

(Yeah I'm blaming stuff...yeah I know it's me that sucks)



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/crystal_20050802

被dz撇掉的男孩

今天, 在一個討論區的愛版裡, 看到一個被女孩撇掉的男孩.

男孩說, 沒有做情侶的份兒, 也想和女孩做一對好好朋友.

但他說, 因為曾經在一起, 分開後, 要找回好好朋友的那種感覺很難.

看到這裡, "唉"了一聲

英雄所見略同啊!

分手後, 跟她說話時都只想盡快說完, 掛上電話, 或把網上即時通訊軟件的對話視窗關掉.

但其他時候卻會偶然想起一此和她一起的片段, 或走到一些地方會想起一些計劃過的行程, 和做過的一些事.

" 她起床時再早也下午二時多了. 約三時多接她, 吃點東西後坐纜車到山頂去(她還未有坐過纜車呢!), 然後去看日落(同時sweet一番), 然後再吃點東西, 然後又坐纜車回中環, 去旁邊的香港公園(再sweet一番), 如果她想的話到中環走走, 在港外線碼頭吹吹海風(和sweet一番), 然後又可以慢慢的走到金鐘, 最後地下鐵回去, 依依不捨的(在Goodbye Kiss後)送她回家, 然後自己回家."

其中一個行程, 很沉悶吧!

難怪我被撇掉.

啊, 越說越遠了.

我想說的是, 只要那些記憶還在, 我還是做不了她的朋友.

或許是因為我經驗還不夠吧

有經驗的, 不知會怎樣呢?

看倌們留個言吧 :D

Vanessa

Latest photos uploaded : Vanessa @ Hong Kong Park



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/vanessa_20050809

Ginny

All new photos - Ginny @ Hong Kong Park



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/ginny_20050809

Dating Quiz

Your dating personality profile:

Shy - You are often timid around others, though you will open up when
the right person comes along.

Liberal - Politics matters to you, and you aren't afraid to share your
left-leaning views. You would never be caught voting for a conservative candidate.

Big-Hearted - You are a kind and caring person. Your warmth is inviting,
and your heart is a wellspring of love.

Your Top Ten Traits
1. Shy
2. Liberal
3. Big-Hearted
4. Practical
5. Romantic
6. Sensual
7. Adventurous
8. Wealthy/Ambitious
9. Traditional
10. Stylish

Your date match profile:

Practical - You are drawn to people who are sensible and smart. Flashy,
materialistic people turn you off. You appreciate the simpler side of living.

Big-Hearted - You want someone compassionate, someone gentle and kind.
A loving, nurturing person will fill that hole in your life.

Adventurous - You are looking for someone who is willing to try new things
and experience life to its fullest. You need a companion who encourages you
to take risks and do exciting things.

Your Top Ten Match Traits
1. Practical
2. Big-Hearted
3. Adventurous
4. Romantic
5. Traditional
6. Intellectual
7. Outgoing
8. Wealthy/Ambitious
9. Conservative
10. Stylish

Damn this seems quite accurate...

Queenie Part II

Here's Queenie @ Tsing Yi IVE Part II (Film)



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/queenie_20050818_film

「影會」?

不知為何要把錢看得這麼重呢?致 貴「影會」之負責人

對不起, 我實在想不懂 貴「影會」憑甚麼可以不讓我邀請一個自由身的模特兒私影.

貴「影會」之負責人曾向我表示此乃違反 貴「影會」的程序, 是我程序上的錯誤.

據我所知, 貴「影會」還未成立, 也沒有跟一些模特兒有約在先.

一個未成立的「影會」, 何來程序?

另外, 一個模特兒, 如果沒有和任何機構/人物之間, 有任何關於成為該機構/人物旗下的模特兒的協定, 就是一個自由身的模特兒.

也就是說, 我只是邀請一個自由身的模特兒出席私影.

不過, 念在我和 貴「影會」之其中一位負責人的友情, 我已向雙方取消任何協定, 即Queenie小姐以模特兒身份出席本星期六(27/8/2005)由ac520先生, Voodoo_Cowboy先生等人舉辦的私影一事.

另外, 所有因此而起的其他事情, 我會一概承擔所有後果, 包括以後不能在香港任何攝影活動現身之類.

但我對此事向 貴提出最嚴厲的抗議.

還有, 別告訴我甚麼「不明文規定」. 我在此也同時向該「不明文規定」提出最強烈的不滿.

祝
生意興隆

Cassio
24/8/2005後記(25/8/2005) :
看來並不只是該「影會」的問題, 而是主流影會的文化
算吧...
有空我會慢慢談論一下我的看法

Queenie Part I

Cassio's Photo Album is proud to present - Queenie @ Tsing Yi IVE Part I (Digital)



http://cassio.mygallery.biz/queenie_20050818_digi

Neave Lab - Flash Earth

Flash Earth

MSN Virtual Earth + Google Earth

Flash Based

Not bad!

有感而發3

嘴裡說想要忘記妳, 指頭卻再按下 "w" "w" "w" "." "x" "a" "n" "g" "a" "." "c" "o" "m" "/" "y" "_" "_" "_" "_" "_" "_" "i" 這22個鍵 (書簽早已刪除了) (保密關係其中一部份以"_"代替) (看倌別問為何要保密) (也不要問我關於這部落格的問題) (更別問為何用這麼多括號) (關你鬼事)

Entar, 進去

第一眼看到頂頭的字換了. 第一句, 讀完一遍又一遍, 卻始終想不到我想要的答案. 第二句, 嘿...這個我還不知道...肯定未集慣, 但我害怕嗎? 第三句, 暫時還不大同意, 但讓我學懂ga的寫法是"咖". 第四句, 唔, 我也是. 看完, 突然發現好像對號入座了, 而且座得蠻舒服. 是給我的位置嗎?

再住下看, 喲, 四時半才回家, 該早點睡嘛. 呀, 又抽菸了, 身體要緊啊, 戒掉它吧

看到這裡, 心裡又痛了一痛

原來忘記一個人這麼難

剛開始時給自己一天的時間, 把妳忘記, 後來不停把限期延長. 今天延了四次, 是第五天了

很多謝榮笑(別問他是誰)這幾天每天把我弄出街(包括連續10小時9分鐘卡拉OK, 19:51-06:00(+1), 真棒!), 讓我不會獨自在家空想 (當天晚上就已經把我弄出去, 天, 你怎知道的? 肚子裡的迴蟲嗎?)

或許是我太認真吧

但我卻想不到為甚麼應該不認真

突然想起Jim Carey的Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (戲名, 港譯"無痛失戀")

又想起陳奕迅的"16月6日 晴"16月6日 晴 陳奕迅

別了她沒有家還要問我可真睇化
運氣差臉上帶暗啞
行為仍然很高雅不敢有淚灑
然而旁人仍在說笑話
日記中述記低和她那天一起卜卦
又記寫曾經與她家裡插花
章節裡面有很多的戲碼
今天翻看了仍舊照哭淚仍照下

道別了她心碎像似亂麻
再妄想可以親她一下
但沒法可將片段再捏拿
獨對手機中那號碼像發夢如天將塌下
人呆立如傻瓜
自問太蠢不會學懂欺詐
悔咎將口舌打結如麻
萬料也想不到笨也換來
痛罵嗎

沒接她沒送花還說道理將她點化
沒有講 說話去哄她
獨自在自貶身價 真的快樂嗎
在自問同時自答 廢話
日記中又記低曾經與她海邊吵架
為了無聊浪漫海邊去鋸扒
章節裡面有很多的變化
今天番看了仍舊照哭淚仍照下

道別了她心碎像似亂麻
再妄想可以親她一下
但沒法可將片段再捏拿
送遞情深的說話
縱耀眼如畫
景致像無聊漫畫
印象如此的差
揭露我的瘡疤
困惑如小青蛙
可稱霸

道別了心碎像似亂麻
仍然沒法強裝瀟灑
發夢也無暇 驚怕
沒辦法將片段再捏拿
赤痛心裡打結如麻
像沒法可以在這年華
拋卻牽掛 一切在等火化

如像似落霞 等消化
算吧不是全部內容都適合(例如"運氣差臉上帶暗啞"改為"運氣差臉上帶暗瘡"會較接近現實), 但內容大意不同也不遠矣

另一 : 榮笑生日快樂!

另二 : 星期六/日考IELTS了, 祝我好運

另三 : 一直想不懂, 為甚麼會是"Entar"而不是"Enter"呢?

後加一 : 為甚麼我會寫這麼怪的中文呢? Why isn't this in English?

後加二 : 為甚麼會想起Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind呢? 我不至痛到那個程度, 而且我也不知我是不是真想忘記妳. 始終那兩天總算是我一生到現在為止最快樂的其中兩天, 也肯定是我在英國裡的日子中最高興的兩天. 多謝妳. 或許遇到一個比妳好的, 我便會忘記妳. 但遙遙無期啊!

改 : "認真"變了"識真", 看來我不夠認真呢

Taipei Photos

Photos from my trip to Taipei are uploaded

http://cassio.mygallery.biz/Taipei

enjoy.......mainly bollocks photos though.....

New Pics

By The Way, New Photos Uploaded

http://cassio.mygallery.biz/

HP6

finished hp6.

now i know a lot more about voldemort (pronounced with a silent "t")

not a nice ending, not as nice as i would've liked anyway

no spoilers here...

Cassio's Photo Album Released

Highly Anticipated

Cassio's Photo Album

Out Now

http://cassio.mygallery.biz/

-Highly Anticipated-

-Highly Anticipated-

Cassio's Photo Gallery

Coming to a computer near you...

July, 2005

20050605

I realised i should've talked a bit about my revision. haven't done any C2/C3/M2/S2 stuff yet. Economics is bollocks, computing should be fine once i get the system fucking life cycles stuffed into my head. oh, and the data protection acts and all that bullshit as well. the others are, hopefully fine. M1 should be ok, and so is S1.
damn i think i should change this blog's time back to gmt w/ daylight saving - hkt-7 well now, back to computing and the fucking data protection act and how should you sit

20050510

Forgot to say I just knew my econ marks today. 23/40. Damn...M2 tomorrow, and S2 after that, and C3 after that. Bollocks.
Cassio@Treo180

20050509

Ha...i am now the chairman of the photographic club, and the vice-chairman of the computer club and chinese martial arts club. Ah...bugger.
Cassio@Treo180

Palm Vx Sync Cable that does not work - 2 

Palm Vx Sync Cable that does not work - 1

Palm Vx Sync Cable that does not work - 1

20050119

also about the exams, i probably have an a/b in m1, but definitely a b or lower in s1 >.<

probably retake it or something

mock exams in march, damn

bugger

"feng shui"? predictions?

出生日期 1987 年 9 月 26 日
天干: 戊
地支: 寅


[結果]:
命屬戊土
為人穩重，實際，重面子
身體狀況佳，如命格中無刑沖，應為長壽之命
感情方面易有第三者出現，需謹慎防犯
女命丈夫為有福祿之人，事業上易得成就
猴年夫妻宮受沖，感情特別容易有問題出現

sounds right.....part of it

20050111

did the computing hw on the plane, in BUSINESS CLASS :D

just finished C1 exam, not too hard, nice

hard stuff coming : M1, S1

wasted £65 ><

20050105

do a tiny bit of computing hw, still have a lot to finish.........damnit
bloody hell, leaving 11:50am fri to amsterdam and then london

fuck i got exams............fucking scared of them

joey

finally mey joey :)

prettier than i expected, and a little bit shorter than i thought :x

went to a place called "paris cafe", had a cup of latte

not too good, this place

looking forward to meeting you again ;)

*photo deleted due to.......er.......pressure*

p.s. 自然D係好D :P

hiya

geez.......long time no see (this blog)

been to uk, back, and leaving on 7 jan again

meeting gordon tomorrow and his friend.

very much looking forward to meeting joey as well

just been to pumb gathering, by the way. had lots of fun playing uno. like those rules more